From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Jul 17 19:54:08 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 570B437B401
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>;
	Thu, 17 Jul 2003 19:54:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp1.adl2.internode.on.net (smtp1.adl2.internode.on.net
	[203.16.214.181])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18CE443F93
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>;
	Thu, 17 Jul 2003 19:54:07 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from malcolm.kay@internode.on.net)
Received: from smtp1.adl2.internode.on.net (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	h6I2s0na020289	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>;
	Fri, 18 Jul 2003 12:24:03 +0930 (CST)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost)h6I2s0eJ020285
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>;
	Fri, 18 Jul 2003 12:24:00 +0930 (CST)
X-Authentication-Warning: smtp1.adl2.internode.on.net: mailnull set sender to
	<malcolm.kay@internode.on.net> using -f
Received: from beta.home (ppp398.sa.padsl.internode.on.net [150.101.245.141])
	h6I2rana020201;	Fri, 18 Jul 2003 12:24:00 +0930
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Malcolm Kay <malcolm.kay@internode.on.net>
Organization: At home
To: "Mike Maltese" <mike@pcmedx.com>, <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 12:23:36 +0930
User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3
References: <003f01c34cc7$5e67a700$f4f0a8c0@pcmedx.com>
In-Reply-To: <003f01c34cc7$5e67a700$f4f0a8c0@pcmedx.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <200307181223.36296.malcolm.kay@internode.on.net>
X-Proc-As: freebsd-questions
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.33 (www . roaringpenguin . com / mimedefang)
Subject: Re: vinum and newfs
X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: User questions <freebsd-questions.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>,
	<mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>,
	<mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 02:54:08 -0000

On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 10:26, Mike Maltese wrote:
> What impact do disk block and fragment sizes have on a vinum volume?  I=
've
> been benchmarking an array of three drives in striped and raid5
> configurations with various stripe sizes.  I've noticed that I get bett=
er
> results in just about every instance by passing -b 16384 -f 2048 to new=
fs.
> This doesn't make sense to me as those are the defaults for newfs if th=
ey
> are not specified, but looking at the disklabel after a newfs, it shows
> 8192/1024. Should these options really make a performance difference, a=
nd
> if so, how?
>
> Thanks, Mike

I have had similar experience, getting 8192/1024 when using newfs on a vi=
num=20
volume. Obviously 16384/2048 is not the default in this case, in spite of=
 the=20
newfs man pages.=20

In a classical file system I believe these numbers are taken from the=20
disklabel and it is realy the disklabel that supplies these defaults for =
the=20
partitions. For vinum the individual volumes do not have a corresponding=20
disklabel partition. -- All guess work so don't take it too seriously.

Malcolm